Interesting, and research seems to support the idea that preexisting tendencies have been formalised in Christianity. As to the specifics of the reasons why, perhaps the greater degree of individual self-sufficiency, and ability to adapt to lone environments predisposed NW Europeans to more individualism. That is not to say clans and family lines were unimportant, but the multiple layers of Roman and Germanic customs, cultural and ethnic cross-pollination and more fundamentally, climate which demands a lot of personal investment for survival means that small family groups are preferred, as opposed to a large number of closely related people that strain boh resource availability and genetic variability.
I'm surprised as well. My previous understanding was the total opposite- i.e, that restrictions on cousin marriage were something imposed on the pagan world very much in opposition to their habit and custom (I guess monogamy was more of the imposition in that respect.)
The mystery is why WEIRDness evolved in northwest Europeans and not in other populations. The only thing that really sets them apart in prehistory would be the large numbers of fisher-sealers who lived around the North Sea and the Baltic during Mesolithic times. This was one of the few cases where humans developed large semi-sedentary communities without the benefit of farming. For half of the year, they congregated in large coastal settlements for fishing and sealing.
That kind of social environment may have weakened kinship ties in order to reduce clan rivalry. There may also have been selection for impersonal pro-sociality and for moral systems that apply equally to everyone, regardless of kin relatedness.
I am skeptical that the unusual beliefs and behaviors of Northwest Europeans came from marriage patterns established by the Catholic church. And unless someone can come up with evidence of similar beliefs and behaviors within the early steppe invaders of Europe, I am skeptical of that origin as well.
I think the most likely origin of WIERD psychologies and behaviors was living within societies with comparatively high levels of market exchange for many generations. There is quite a lot of evidence (including from Henrich himself) that people enmeshed within market societies think and act differently than other people. Most likely sexual selection of women choosing to marry successful men who then had babies more likely to survive into adulthood was a key part of that shift.
I agree that a relationship exists between WEIRDness and the creation of a market economy. To me, it looks like the former preceded the latter.
Yes, markets have long existed. In the Middle East, we see evidence of marketplaces in prehistoric times. Yet Middle Easterners are not WEIRD. Some of the most market-savvy people in the world are the antithesis of WEIRDness.
Keep in mind that a market is not the same thing as a market economy. A market is a small island of commercial activity in a "sea" where most transactions are obligations to family or kin (or symbolic transactions with dead ancestors).
A market economy has at least the potential to commercialize all transactions within a society. It is a radical and relatively recent form of social organization, essentially post-medieval. Today, we live in a market economy where the family is restricted to an increasingly vestigial role.
I recently read Joseph Henrich’s Weirdest People in the World. Fascinating book. But it’s interesting to read a contrary opinion on the cousin marriage ban hypothesis.
Even if Christianity had never existed, something like it would have developed in Europe, and even more so in northwest Europe.
First, Roman society had large numbers of rootless people with no close kin to help them out. This was especially true for slaves and ex-slaves, but it was also true for other people. The low birth rate left many adults without close kin. For such people, the local church offered a substitute family and recreated a family atmosphere with the help of kinship symbolism ("brothers and sisters in Christ," "God the father," etc.).
Second, as civilization spread into northwest Europe, the local beliefs and customs would have been reorganized into something like Christianity. People would still have needed some kind of institutionalized means to purge their burden of guilt, e.g., confession, penance, absolution, etc. They would also have institutionalized charity in various ways, e.g., alms for the poor, hospices, etc.
All of this was less true in Japan. The Japanese do not accumulate a burden of guilt that has to be regularly purged, as is the case with northwest Europeans. Nor do they have the same compulsive need to help strangers.
Jesus wished to reduce, if not eliminate, the importance of kinship in a society where kinship was all important. This is partly why Christianity enjoyed more success in Europe than in the Middle East.
It is quite evident that the people of Northwestern Europe are different from others. However, Christianity played a minimal role in differentiation. Christianity adopted the existing norms.
Didn't Aporia post research a while back indicating genetic changes during the Christian period after a period of late-Roman dysgenics? Small sample size made me a bit skeptical though.
Mostly yes. But the benefit of Protestantism was more reliance on self than on the Church, which in turn enabled more freedom for people to develop their industries.
Pre-Christian Europeans were always more individualistic than other human groups that were more group dominated, suppressed and therefore had no large unity for defense strength. They invented their way out of problems or migrated. Both positive and negative results. Christianity was imposed via financial leverage at first. The combination of the two led to their loss of cultural continuity and being destroyed from the core outward. Shreds remain in distorted forms.
Interesting, and research seems to support the idea that preexisting tendencies have been formalised in Christianity. As to the specifics of the reasons why, perhaps the greater degree of individual self-sufficiency, and ability to adapt to lone environments predisposed NW Europeans to more individualism. That is not to say clans and family lines were unimportant, but the multiple layers of Roman and Germanic customs, cultural and ethnic cross-pollination and more fundamentally, climate which demands a lot of personal investment for survival means that small family groups are preferred, as opposed to a large number of closely related people that strain boh resource availability and genetic variability.
I'm surprised as well. My previous understanding was the total opposite- i.e, that restrictions on cousin marriage were something imposed on the pagan world very much in opposition to their habit and custom (I guess monogamy was more of the imposition in that respect.)
The mystery is why WEIRDness evolved in northwest Europeans and not in other populations. The only thing that really sets them apart in prehistory would be the large numbers of fisher-sealers who lived around the North Sea and the Baltic during Mesolithic times. This was one of the few cases where humans developed large semi-sedentary communities without the benefit of farming. For half of the year, they congregated in large coastal settlements for fishing and sealing.
That kind of social environment may have weakened kinship ties in order to reduce clan rivalry. There may also have been selection for impersonal pro-sociality and for moral systems that apply equally to everyone, regardless of kin relatedness.
Very interesting article.
I am skeptical that the unusual beliefs and behaviors of Northwest Europeans came from marriage patterns established by the Catholic church. And unless someone can come up with evidence of similar beliefs and behaviors within the early steppe invaders of Europe, I am skeptical of that origin as well.
I think the most likely origin of WIERD psychologies and behaviors was living within societies with comparatively high levels of market exchange for many generations. There is quite a lot of evidence (including from Henrich himself) that people enmeshed within market societies think and act differently than other people. Most likely sexual selection of women choosing to marry successful men who then had babies more likely to survive into adulthood was a key part of that shift.
I agree that a relationship exists between WEIRDness and the creation of a market economy. To me, it looks like the former preceded the latter.
Yes, markets have long existed. In the Middle East, we see evidence of marketplaces in prehistoric times. Yet Middle Easterners are not WEIRD. Some of the most market-savvy people in the world are the antithesis of WEIRDness.
Keep in mind that a market is not the same thing as a market economy. A market is a small island of commercial activity in a "sea" where most transactions are obligations to family or kin (or symbolic transactions with dead ancestors).
A market economy has at least the potential to commercialize all transactions within a society. It is a radical and relatively recent form of social organization, essentially post-medieval. Today, we live in a market economy where the family is restricted to an increasingly vestigial role.
I recently read Joseph Henrich’s Weirdest People in the World. Fascinating book. But it’s interesting to read a contrary opinion on the cousin marriage ban hypothesis.
Joseph Heinrich has done a great service by focusing attention on this subject.
I guess without Christianity we’d have been more like the Japanese?
Even if Christianity had never existed, something like it would have developed in Europe, and even more so in northwest Europe.
First, Roman society had large numbers of rootless people with no close kin to help them out. This was especially true for slaves and ex-slaves, but it was also true for other people. The low birth rate left many adults without close kin. For such people, the local church offered a substitute family and recreated a family atmosphere with the help of kinship symbolism ("brothers and sisters in Christ," "God the father," etc.).
Second, as civilization spread into northwest Europe, the local beliefs and customs would have been reorganized into something like Christianity. People would still have needed some kind of institutionalized means to purge their burden of guilt, e.g., confession, penance, absolution, etc. They would also have institutionalized charity in various ways, e.g., alms for the poor, hospices, etc.
All of this was less true in Japan. The Japanese do not accumulate a burden of guilt that has to be regularly purged, as is the case with northwest Europeans. Nor do they have the same compulsive need to help strangers.
Looks great but I'll need an evening to get through it. Thanks
Can't help but think of Jesus asking "Who is my mother?" as the Virgin Mary pines outside the tent in Matthew 12:46-50.
Jesus wished to reduce, if not eliminate, the importance of kinship in a society where kinship was all important. This is partly why Christianity enjoyed more success in Europe than in the Middle East.
It is quite evident that the people of Northwestern Europe are different from others. However, Christianity played a minimal role in differentiation. Christianity adopted the existing norms.
Didn't Aporia post research a while back indicating genetic changes during the Christian period after a period of late-Roman dysgenics? Small sample size made me a bit skeptical though.
For those who are not familiar with the Henrich book that this article refers to, here is a summary of it on my online library of book summaries:
https://techratchet.com/2021/03/17/book-summary-the-wierdest-people-in-the-world-by-joseph-henrich/
Short answer: yes. Longer answer: depends on the sect. Protestant definitely more so than others.
Northwest Europeans were WEIRD before Protestantism.
Mostly yes. But the benefit of Protestantism was more reliance on self than on the Church, which in turn enabled more freedom for people to develop their industries.
Pre-Christian Europeans were always more individualistic than other human groups that were more group dominated, suppressed and therefore had no large unity for defense strength. They invented their way out of problems or migrated. Both positive and negative results. Christianity was imposed via financial leverage at first. The combination of the two led to their loss of cultural continuity and being destroyed from the core outward. Shreds remain in distorted forms.
> "Christianity was imposed via financial leverage at first"
Citation needed?